Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Magic WH-Questions and their Effect on L2 Oral Performance of EFL Learners

Journal Name:

  • Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2015

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This mixed methods study investigated the effect of wh-question type of graphic organizer as a learning tool on helping university students to organize their thoughts and to improve their speaking skill. Fifty five learners from two classes at a pre-intermediate level of proficiency were randomly assigned to one experimental and one control group. To the experimental group, the graphic organizer was described and illustrated with examples of Fishbone Diagram for eight sessions, while the control group just received a placebo. The two groups were administered a pre-test and a post-test. T-tests of dependent and independent samples were carried out to find the significant differences within the groups and across the groups. The findings displayed that the introduction of the diagram produced positive results on students’ speaking proficiency and their ability to orally present the completed diagram. Further, the findings revealed that the graphic organizer was helpful in allowing the students to organize their thoughts after answering wh-questions by using graphic organizers. For the qualitative part of the study, the participants from the experimental group were administered a questionnaire. They commented that the use of the graphic organizer enhanced the instructional process and they came to believe that it had some effect on their students’ speaking scores.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-magic-wh-questions-and-their-effect-l2-oral-performance-efl-learners.pdf
  • 1
111
126
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1999). ACTFL performance guidelines for K-12 learners. Yonkers, NY: ACTFL.
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 123
2015, Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 13, 111-126.
2015, Journal of Language and Literature Education, 13, 111-126.
Blachowicz, C. & Ogle, D. (2001). Reading comprehension: Strategies for independent learners. New York: The Guilford Press.
Block, C.C. & Israel, S.E. (2005). Reading first and beyond: The complete guide for teachers and literacy coaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bromley, K., Irwin-DeVitis, L., & Modlo, M. (1995). Graphic organizers: Visual strategies for active learning. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Bromley, K., Irwin-DeVitis, L., & Modlo, M. (1999). 50 graphic organizers for reading, writing and more. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Brown, D. (1994). Teaching by principles. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regent.
Chamot, A.U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P.B., & Robbins, J. (1998). The learning strategies handbook. Cambridge, UK: Longman.
Drapeau, P. (1998). Great teaching with graphic organizers: Lessons and fun-shaped templates that motivate kids of all learning styles. New York: Scholastic Professional Books.
Dunston, P.J. (1992). A critique of graphic organizer research. Reading Research & Instruction, 32(2), 57-65.
Ellis, N. (1997). Vocabulary Acquisition: Word Structure, Collocation, Word-Class and Meaning. In N. Schmitt, & M. McCarthy, (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 122 -140). Cambridge: Cambridge United Press.
Heinze-Fry, J.A. & Novak, J.D. (1990). Concept mapping brings long-term movement toward meaningful learning. Science Education, 74, 461-472.
Jiang, X. & Grabe, W. (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, 19(1), 33-45
Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004). A synthesis of research on graphic organizers and their effect on reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 105-118.
Levelt, W.J.M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Levelt, W.J.M., Roelofs, A., Meyer, A.S. (2000). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38. 124
2015, Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 13, 111-126.
2015, Journal of Language and Literature Education, 13, 111-126.
Louisot-Mesopotanese, N. (2009). The effects of graphic organizers on improving the reading comprehension of second grade students. Unpublished MA thesis, Caldwell College. UMI Number: 1462775.
Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increased student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Martin, J. (2006). Fishy story. Jurnal Penyelidikan Tindakan Tahun, 1, 29-41.
Monroe, E.E. (1998). Using graphic organizers to teach vocabulary: Does available research inform mathematics instruction? Education, 118(4), 538-540.
Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Thomson/Heinle.
Richards, J.C. (2005). Interchange intro (3rd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Richards, J.C. & Renandya, W.A. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, M.D. (1998). Running from William James’ bear: A review of pre attentive mechanisms and their contributions to emotional experience. Cognition and Emotion, 12, 667-696.
Robinson, D.H. & Skinner, C.H. (1996). Why Organizers facilitate search processes: Fewer words or computationally efficient indexing? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 166-180.
Ruhe, V. (1996). Graphics and listening comprehension. TESL Canada Journal, 14(1), 45-60.
Sökmen, A.J. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp. 237-257). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sorenson, S. (1991). Working with special students in English language arts. TRIED, ED 336902, Bloomington, IN: ERICC learning house on Reading and Communication Skills.
Tang, G. (1992). The effect of graphic representation of knowledge structures on ESL reading comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 177-195. 125
2015, Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 13, 111-126.
2015, Journal of Language and Literature Education, 13, 111-126.
Teele, S. (2004). Overcoming barricades to reading a multiple intelligences approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Tsubaki, M. (2012). Vocabulary learning with graphic organizers in the EFL environment: Inquiry into the involvement load hypothesis. Education dissertation, Temple University, United States. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. UMI 3494138.
Vaughn, S. & Edmonds, M. (2006). Reading comprehension for older readers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(3), 131-137.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. (E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.
Wittrock, M.C. (1992). Generative learning processes of the brain. Educational Psychologist, 27(4), 531-541.
126

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com